[hannah]

DH has perfect credit. DH has a MC and a VISA. The MC had some charges on the bill due on Sept 1, 2006, which he did not recognize. He took the bill with him and left it in his vehicle. DH is only home on weekends. I pay all the bills. Frankly, I forgot about paying the MC bill until I received a call from a collection agency asking for DH. He has NEVER received a call from a CA before. The woman on the phone (I recorded it) gave me no miranda warnings until I asked her about it after a nasty exchange when I refused to do a check-by-phone. She called on 9/6, five days after bill was due. This was NOT in house collections, this was a CA. I called DH and told him and he said just pay it anyhow and when he got home we'd discuss it. I did not call the OC about it then as DH said not to. So I did an online bill pay of the MC on the 6th which was credited to his account on the 10th even though the debit of his checking went through the same day (6th). I paid both the past due and the bill due October 1st as well. There is no balance on the card except for charges this past week or so as DH uses it for gasoline and food while on the road. Easier to keep track for taxes if on CC.

Yesterday DH received a letter from the CA stating the usual for a CA including the miranda, etc., for the entire amount that I already paid over a week ago. I called OC and they said they had no record of the account at all. I asked to speak to supervisor. Supervisor was a bit testy with me and finally confirmed that the account was paid in full and nothing owing as of yesterday. I asked why an account that was deliquent less than a week had been turned over for collection and could not get an answer. He kept hemming and hawing and I am now stumped at what is going on. He also told me to throw away the letter from the collection agency. Any thoughts? Comments?? We are going to sock drawer the CC and use only the VISA until this is straightened out. This whole thing is insane. He has never been late on the CC before and he has had the card for 7 years. None of our other accounts have been paid late and I am afraid of a universal rate jack. I haven't pulled his CR yet but will in 30 days.

Edited to add: Forgot to mention that this is a prime card with a major bank.

[Hedwig]

If he had charges he didn't recognize, you should not have paid them if you are going to dispute. You should have paid the rest and sent a letter that charges were disputed.

I'm stumped, too, about what is going on. Are you sure it's for the same card and that someone else hasn't opened an account in his name? I have accounts with most of the major banks and if I get a call on a missed payment it's several weeks later, not several days, and from the OC, not a collector.

I think there's something misssing here, maybe something you don't know yet. Was the full account number on the CA letter?

I'd be tempted to send a dispute to the CA asking for verification of the account and the amount. They're supposed to get it from the OC. If they do, they'll be told the account is paid in full.

It truly could be someone else's account, but something is fishy here.

[hannah]

Originally Posted by Hedwig

If he had charges he didn't recognize, you should not have paid them if you are going to dispute. You should have paid the rest and sent a letter that charges were disputed.

I'm stumped, too, about what is going on. Are you sure it's for the same card and that someone else hasn't opened an account in his name? I have accounts with most of the major banks and if I get a call on a missed payment it's several weeks later, not several days, and from the OC, not a collector.

I think there's something misssing here, maybe something you don't know yet. Was the full account number on the CA letter?

I'd be tempted to send a dispute to the CA asking for verification of the account and the amount. They're supposed to get it from the OC. If they do, they'll be told the account is paid in full.

It truly could be someone else's account, but something is fishy here.

The real account number is on the CA letter. I am going to send a DV. The supervisor would not address if the account had been recalled from the CA. The charges DH was questioning were amounts of the charges not the merchants. He says he thinks his receipts aren't as high as the charges on the CC invoice. I still haven't gotten a chance to talk with him. He's golfing...

I am going to DV the CA just for snorts and giggles...something is not right here and I just can't figure out what it is...unless someone royally screwed up and they are trying to hide it. What else was really annoying and has never happened before is that when I called the OC, I was on hold to speak to a CSR for 45 minutes. They must have been really busy. They longest I have ever been on hold for a CSR when I called them is a few seconds. Could this be a really BIG screwup?? And you are correct...something is really fishy here...

[Pale Rider]

I don't think they could report anything, as it was never 30 days late. But, cover both ends to make sure.

Send DV to CA, wich will stop all collection activity (there should be none anyway).

Send written dispute to OC under FCBA, wich also stops credit reporting of disputed amount.

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/credit/fcb.htm


.

[Hedwig]

Originally Posted by hannah

The charges DH was questioning were amounts of the charges not the merchants. He says he thinks his receipts aren't as high as the charges on the CC invoice. I still haven't gotten a chance to talk with him. He's golfing...

A dispute doesn't just mean that the charge is from someone you don't recognize, it could be the amount. I've heard of places that charge a higher amount, thinking you won't check it. Then they pocket the difference. This was especially true at places like restaurants. They take the card and bring back the receipt to sign, but don't bring back the original bill. My husband always asks for it.

This would still be disputable, and you should never pay amounts in dispute.

Several years ago, I started saving all receipts. I have a basket, and my husband and I both put all credit card receipts there. The when we got the bill, I match the receipts against the bill. At least in theory. Since I've been in school I don't always have time to do it.

[hannah]

Originally Posted by Hedwig

A dispute doesn't just mean that the charge is from someone you don't recognize, it could be the amount. I've heard of places that charge a higher amount, thinking you won't check it. Then they pocket the difference. This was especially true at places like restaurants. They take the card and bring back the receipt to sign, but don't bring back the original bill. My husband always asks for it.

This would still be disputable, and you should never pay amounts in dispute.

Several years ago, I started saving all receipts. I have a basket, and my husband and I both put all credit card receipts there. The when we got the bill, I match the receipts against the bill. At least in theory. Since I've been in school I don't always have time to do it.

I thought you thought someone else made charges. The charges were all his. He just thought the amounts were wrong. And I filled out the online dispute form when I made the payment. I will also send a letter as well. CMRRR of course. I haven't seen the receipts yet so need to ask DH for them when he ever gets home...

[jlynn]

oops said something dumb.

[hannah]

Originally Posted by jlynn

oops said something dumb.

Have you been drinking??

[jlynn]

Originally Posted by hannah

Have you been drinking??

I wish

[VexatiousLitigant]

Not to rain on your parade, but FDCPA does not apply here. (6)(F)(iii).

There was a Joe Consumer v NCO case where NCO was collecting on non defaulted, late debts for Cap1 that was dismissed because NCO was not a debt collector in that case.

[hannah]

Originally Posted by VexatiousLitigant

Not to rain on your parade, but FDCPA does not apply here. (6)(F)(iii).

There was a Joe Consumer v NCO case where NCO was collecting on non defaulted, late debts for Cap1 that was dismissed because NCO was not a debt collector in that case.

I did not post this to try for any violations or to guage it for a lawsuit. I posted it to try to find out what was going on. Not every situation calls for a lawsuit, just an understanding. I will have to DV this if only to get a response that all is well. It is an odd situation and I've never even heard of anything like this happening before.

[Pale Rider]

You can still go with the FCBA. But, make sure the dispute is in writing within 60 days of the error.

[VexatiousLitigant]

Originally Posted by hannah

I did not post this to try for any violations or to guage it for a lawsuit. I posted it to try to find out what was going on. Not every situation calls for a lawsuit, just an understanding. I will have to DV this if only to get a response that all is well. It is an odd situation and I've never even heard of anything like this happening before.

Okay along those lines, I would suspect it's not entirely uncommon. Someone from CIC got a collection letter from a 3rd party on an account that was a few days late.

The letter you received probably went out the same day or next day that you spoke with the CA via phone. I suspect you won't hear from them again on this issue, since they probably would've called again in a week's time.

I would not give this another thought unless you hear from the CA regarding that paid balance again.

[Gib]

Originally Posted by VexatiousLitigant

Not to rain on your parade, but FDCPA does not apply here. (6)(F)(iii).

There was a Joe Consumer v NCO case where NCO was collecting on non defaulted, late debts for Cap1 that was dismissed because NCO was not a debt collector in that case.

Plain language of the statute:

6) The term "debt collector" means any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another. Notwithstanding the exclusion provided by clause (F) of the last sentence of this paragraph, the term includes any creditor who, in the process of collecting his own debts, uses any name other than his own which would indicate that a third person is collecting or attempting to collect such debts. For the purpose of section 808(6), such term also includes any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the enforcement of security interests.

The case law is bogus and should have been appealed. The FDCPA doesn't say the debt has to be in default. By obtained. I would have to beleive that means purchased debt. To support that argument, if an original creditor is using a different name, implying a third party collector, the FDCPA applies.

[VexatiousLitigant]

Originally Posted by Gib

The case law is bogus and should have been appealed. The FDCPA doesn't say the debt has to be in default.

The term does NOT include—
(F) any person collecting or attempting to collect any debt owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another to the extent such activity
(iii) concerns a debt which was NOT IN DEFAULT at the time it was obtained by such person; or

It says it right there.

By obtained. I would have to beleive that means purchased debt.

What happened to "plain language of the statute"? It plainly states obtained not "purchased".

[Gib]

Don't get pissy. How can 2 seperate entities control the same debt? They haven't "obtained" the debt. If the OC still owns it, the third party is collecting on a debt due or asserted owed to another.

[Pale Rider]

It is current now, but the CA was collecting during a brief period when the account was in default. So, they were/are covered by FDCPA, when they demand payment after the account defaulted. Any violation during that time cannot be undone.

I say DV the CA and FCBA the OC just to protect your rights if nothing else. If the charges come back as correct, you haven't lost anything. If they are not correct, or the parties act stupid, you have protected your rights.